TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. A Note to Our Readers
2. US-Trained, "Incorruptible" Mexican Anti-Narcotics Squad Widely Corrupted
3. ALERT: McCollum Drug Act Would Further Militarize Andean Drug War
4. Texas Paper Releases Scathing Pentagon Review of Esequiel Hernandez Shooting
5. Whitman, AIDS Council Still at Odds Over Needle Exchange
6. Fayetteville City Council Rejects Random Drug Testing
7. New Jersey Supreme Court Finds Right to Jury Trial in Forfeiture Cases
8. March To Stop The Drug War, Berkeley, CA, 9/26
9. First-Ever Global Conference on How To Legalize Cannabis
10. Attention College Students!
11. NY Attorney General Candidates Admit Past Marijuana Use
12. Patient's Glaucoma Justified Medical Marijuana Use, Cultivation, Canadian Judge Rules
13. EDITORIAL: Long, Hot Summer

1. A Note to our Readers

Well, summer is over, and while we hope that everyone had a relaxing season, there is much to be done this fall. So, while many of you were enjoying vacation and weekends at the beach, DRCNet has made some major changes, including several new lists, a major overhaul of our web sites, a great opportunity for students to get active, and much more which you will be hearing a lot about in this issue of The Week Online and over the next few weeks.

In addition, while the weather begins to cool off, things in the reform movement are really heating up. And because the movement is entering such an important phase, it is vital that you, the people who understand the enormity of the damage being done in the name of the Drug War, step up your efforts and make your voices heard. DRCNet enters this new season nearly 7,000 strong, with plans in place that could increase our numbers many-fold. If you think you can help us in that mission, please get in touch and we'll send out email sign-up sheets or help you in any other way possible. Remember, the more people that we can reach in your state, the more impact your efforts will have.

Our first action alert of the fall went out early yesterday morning, regarding the possible parole and release of Will Foster, originally sentenced to 93 years, and who has spent more than two years in jail, suffering from rheumatoid arthritis and separated from his family for cultivating medicinal marijuana. So far, more than 120 of you have written to let us know that you did take action on behalf of Will Foster, in response to our alert. Thank you! You'll be interested to know that in response to the flood of phone calls, the governor's office has set up a special voice mailbox just for calls about Will Foster.

If you have not yet taken a moment to write, fax or call Governor Keating of Oklahoma in response, please consider doing so today. We are committed to increasing our response rate significantly in the coming months, but that will only happen if YOU take a moment to respond, with a letter, phone call, fax or email, when an action alert arrives in your in-box. Your voice IS important, and politicians, the media and other decision-makers DO take notice. The Will Foster case is indicative of that, and we, as a movement, are only just beginning to flex our political muscle. (If you missed the alert, you can access it on our web site at http://www.drcnet.org/rapid/1998/9-10.html.)

Please note that article three of this issue is another action alert, opposing a bill in Congress that would further arm Latin American militaries in the name of the drug war, militaries that in some cases have appalling human rights records and even sponsor death squads to deal with dissenters. The source country strategy on which this bill is based has failed -- not partially, but completely -- to reduce the global availability of opium or cocaine -- and in its wake has fueled political instability and sometimes outright civil conflict in these nations that are struggling to establish democracy against a history of dictatorship. An article in issue #43 of The Week Online -- http://www.drcnet.org/wol/043.html#bolivia -- describes a personal tragedy that resulted directly from the U.S. government's fraudulent Andean drug war. Take some of the excitement you've shown for the Will Foster case, and use it to mobilize on this alert as well. Your abction here -- less directly but just as surely -- will help prevent more innocent people from falling victim to the war on drugs. And please, send copies of your correspondence, or just a note letting us know what actions you've taken, to [email protected]. Your feedback will help us document our impact and give our donors and potential donors confidence that their support is building a potent force for change. Can we get another 100 letters on this one?

(A long-standing alert that is still important is helping promote the book Drug Crazy -- a book which happens to give a devastating account of the war on drugs in the Andes, among other topics, and which promotes groups in the movement through an Internet appendix, especially DRCNet. This exciting book by DRCNet advisory board member Mike Gray, author of the China Syndrome among other credits, is capable of changing the debate on drug policy if only it goes big. See http://www.drcnet.org/wol/057.html#slate for some background and suggestions for what to do.)

So welcome back from vacation, and get ready to act. Because YOU represent the leading edge of the next great political and social movement in the history of the United States, and of the world. The Drug War is beginning to crumble, but after decades of violence, profits, repression and injustice, it will not go down without a fight.

2. US-Trained, "Incorruptible" Mexican Anti-Narcotics Squad Widely Corrupted

More than 80 members of an "elite counter-narcotics" force within the Mexican Army are under investigation for corruption, and more than a dozen have already been charged or detained. According to the Washington Post, more than 40 of the troops have been removed from their station at the Mexico City Airport due to allegations that they have taken hundreds of thousands of dollars for shepherding drug shipments as well as illegal aliens past customs.

The special force, which goes under its Spanish-language acronym GAFE, came into existence in 1996 in response to frustrations over corruption within both the police and military structures in Mexico. Many of the officers involved (around 10% of the total personnel) in the program were brought to the U.S. for training at a cost of over $28 million to U.S. taxpayers, according to the Post. The corruption in Mexico was so ingrained, in fact, that over the past two years, both the nation's Drug Czar and the brother of former President Salinas have been implicated.

Lt. Colonel Darley at the U.S. Pentagon told The Week Online, "None of (the most recent report) is wholly unexpected. In fact, what we've seen is that anything touched by drugs and drug money becomes corrupted. It's not just a Mexican problem, we see the same thing all over the world. Even here, you can look at the problems in the Florida police force, in the New York police force. So it's not a matter of saying that Mexico is a corrupt society. There are millions of Mexicans who hate the drug trafficking, and there are plenty of honest politicians and military personnel and police, many of whom have died fighting against it."

"No one, and this certainly includes the Department of Defense, believes that this (the drug trade) is a problem that will be solved militarily. What it comes down to is a moral issue, and moral choices that are made by individuals. But having said that, we do feel that we are having some impact. We've intercepted tons of drugs which were therefore kept off the streets. But if you ask, 'can we stop the flow through interdiction,' the answer is no. But you can't just throw up your hands. It's a matter of registering disapproval through our actions and, if nothing else, there's value in fighting the good fight. And, if you look at the destruction that drugs do to our society, this is certainly a good fight."

But some critics disagree with that moral equation.

Eric Olson of the Washington Office on Latin America (WOLA) told The Week Online, "International counter-narcotics efforts have been singularly ineffective in large part because they are so militarily-focused. The U.S. has tried to fight this problem as a war. Specifically, when we look at Mexico, the military was brought more deeply into anti-drug efforts because of the perception that the civilian police were widely corrupted and that the military was not. The fact is, however, as indicated by these recent reports, that the process of counter-narcotics itself is corrupting. And so if the Mexican military wasn't corrupted before, it is now. Also, by putting more responsibility in the hands of the military, we have further weakened civilian institutions there, which is the opposite of what we should be striving for in our foreign policy, which would be to build and strengthen civil institutions.

"The Mexican military is problematic in that it is not a transparent and accountable institution. When they commit human rights violations, as they are prone to do, it is nearly impossible to hold them accountable to civilian authorities."

"The broader view, of course, is that anyone who has taken an objective look at our international counternarcotics policy has concluded that it doesn't work. What we need, clearly, is a much broader public debate on the issue and a focus on harm-reduction here at home."

You can visit the Washington Office on Latin America on the web at http://www.wola.org.

3. ALERT: McCollum Drug Act Would Further Militarize Andean Drug War

Personnel at the Washington Office on Latin America (WOLA) have informed us that a bill being voted on the floor on Congress this coming Wednesday (9/16) will dramatically increase the flow of dollars and equipment to Latin American militaries for drug fighting. The "Western Hemisphere Drug Elimination Act," sponsored by Rep. Bill McCollum (R-FL) and Sen. Mike DeWine (R-OH) would authorize $2.3 billion over three years for equipment (mostly military hardware), personnel and training.

In the House, the bill has the solid support of the Republican leadership, and he sponsors are so confident, they have decided to bring the bill to the floor under "suspension of the rules." This is a technical procedure whereby "non-controversial" proposals can be brought to a vote in an expedited fashion, but must pass by a 2/3 majority instead of the usual 50%. This means that the bill can be defeated if its opponents muster 145 votes instead of the usual 217.

Please call or fax your U.S. Representative, and ask him or her to oppose the McCollum Drug Act and the expansion of the failed Andean drug war. You can reach your Representative (or find out who your Representative is) through the Congressional Switchboard at (202) 224-3121. (You can also use http://www.house.gov/writerep/ to look up the office contact info online.)

Points you can use, courtesy of WOLA:

• By offering this bill under suspension, the sponsors intend to rush it through Congress without sufficient debate. This should be a time to debate and re-evaluate current U.S. antinarcotics policy. Instead, the sponsors plan to authorize a lot of money on a policy that has had absolutely no success.
• By offering military equipment and training to Latin American police and militaries with questionable human rights records, the bill undermines fundamental U.S. foreign policy goals of supporting democracy and human rights. Such a policy can also embroil the United States in brutal counterinsurgency wars. The equipment and training received by anti-drug forces can be easily used for counterinsurgency purposes. In the case of Colombia, for example, many Members of Congress reduce guerrillas and drug traffickers into one enemy, the "narcoguerrilla," thereby erasing the line between counternarcotics and counterinsurgency - but in doing so they ignore the army's and right-wing paramilitaries' ties to the drug trade. In Mexico, the same units receiving U.S. counternarcotics training are operating in Chiapas, Guerrero, and Oaxaca.
• By training Latin American militaries in anti-drug police work, the United States is encouraging them to perform domestic law enforcement duties prohibited of the U.S. military. According to the San Francisco Chronicle, "there is little proof that the involvement of [Mexican] soldiers in police work has helped stem the flow of drugs. But there is growing evidence that this controversial program has led to serious human rights abuses."
• The bill pours billions of dollars into counternarcotics programs that have produced only failure. Rep. McCollum claims that if you "prevent drugs from entering the country, ...you drive up the price of drugs. Drive up the price of drugs and you save lives." But supply reduction, as this is known, has actually had the paradoxical result of increasing prices, thus attracting new producers and distributors to the market, and eventually driving prices back down again. The U.S. government has already spent more than $25 billion on interdiction programs and efforts to disrupt drug production in "source countries," but prices for a pure gram of both heroin and cocaine (as measured in 1994 dollars) have declined markedly in the last 15 years.

• For Latin America overall, U.S. government funding for antidrug efforts has increased more than 150 percent over the last ten years; yet by the U.S. State Department's own estimates, coca cultivation is 11.7 percent higher and opium production has doubled over that time period.
• U.S. antidrug efforts have failed most spectacularly in Colombia, the largest recipient of U.S. counter-drug assistance (a total of nearly one billion dollars to date). Yet over the last decade, total drug production in Colombia has risen an estimated 260 percent. Coca production in Colombia has more than tripled, making Colombia the world's leading coca producer. Only four years ago, no heroin was produced in Colombia; it now ranks third in the world in poppy cultivation and fourth in heroin production.

For further information on the Western Hemisphere Drug Elimination Act or the impact of counternarcotics policy on human rights in Latin America, contact Eric Olson, Winifred Tate, or Laurie Freeman at WOLA, (202) 797-2171.

4. Texas Paper Releases Scathing Pentagon Review of Esequiel Hernandez Shooting

Some drug war tragedies can never be undone. One such tragedy is the death of Esequiel Hernandez, shot by a United States Marine on an anti-drug patrol on the U.S.-Mexico border at Redford, Texas. A recently released internal Pentagon report has cleared the Marine, Cpl. Clemente Banuelos, of wrongdoing, but made scathing criticisms of practices that led to the shooting. Retired Marine Maj. Gen. John T. Coyne found that the marines on patrol were not adequately trained for a law enforcement-type operation, and that the missions "appears to have been viewed at every level of Marine Corps command as more of a training opportunity than a real world deployment," among other observations. The Marine Corps has disputed the findings in a written response.

The San Antonio Current has obtained a copy of the Coyne report and posted it on the web, with a detailed article discussing the shooting and related issues. You can read the article at http://www.metrotimes.com/border.html and the Coyne report at http://www.metrotimes.com/coynereport.html on an affiliated paper's site.

Visit the Esequiel Hernandez photo gallery at http://www.mapinc.org/DPFT/hernandez/gallery/.

5. Whitman, AIDS Council Still at Odds Over Needle Exchange

Taylor West

The Governor's Council on AIDS first gained public attention in 1996, when they openly opposed Governor Whitman's stance against needle exchange. Since that time, they have continued to advocate needle exchange programs to Whitman, but with no measurable success. New Jersey has the third highest statewide AIDS infection rate in the country, and half of those cases can be attributed to injection drug use. However, the state's laws against the possession and distribution of syringes remain unusually strict, and needle exchange activists operating illegally have been arrested, tried, and convicted in New Jersey courts.

In her August 5th letter to Troast, Governor Whitman restated her unwavering refusal to support the use of needle exchange programs as HIV prevention. She cited her concerns that the programs "seem" to encourage illegal drug use and "send the wrong message to our children" as the major causes for her opposition. She also encouraged the Council to focus instead on slowing the spread of AIDS among minority females and teenagers. (It may be worthwhile to note that the Centers for Disease Control lists the number one cause of AIDS for minority women as "injection drug use".)

New Jersey activist Diana McCague, director of the Chai Project in New Brunswick, wasn't surprised to hear of Whitman's latest unwillingness to consider needle exchange. "I used to get really upset and agitated to hear the inflexibility coming out of the Governor's Office. Now there isn't much to do but shake your head. Once again, Governor Whitman is showing that she has no idea what the lives of regular people in New Jersey are like."

Members of the New Jersey legislature are pressing on in their attempts to bring a bill legalizing needle exchange through the chambers. Michelle Jaker, a legislative aide for Sen. Joseph Vitale, cosponsor of one of the bills, admitted that the Governor's continued opposition "certainly makes it more difficult" to get such legislation passed. "We're hoping to bring about more awareness of the issue by having this bill in the Senate," she said Thursday.

Meanwhile the Governor's Council is undecided as to how to proceed following this latest setback. Riki Jacobs, a member of the Council and the executive director of the Hyacinth AIDS Foundation in New Brunswick, recognized the apparent irreconcilable nature of Governor Whitman's opinions but wondered, "If we stop talking about this, does this mean we can't discuss any issues that might be controversial or politically unfavorable?" Jacobs said she felt the Council would continue to advocate needle exchange, despite the Governor's apparent resolve against it.

Chai Project director McCague had a different suggestion for the Council. "I think they ought to resign," she stated Thursday. "What are they there for? They're handpicked by the Governor to inform and advise her on AIDS issues. If she's going to refuse to listen to their advice over and over, they aren't being allowed to do what they were brought together for."

"Governor Whitman is again exposing her ignorance and total lack of compassion. For fear of being labeled soft on drugs, she's more than willing to sacrifice drug users, their families and their communities to the AIDS epidemic."

6. Fayetteville City Council Rejects Random Drug Testing

On Tuesday, September 1, the city council of Fayetteville, Arkansas rejected a proposal which would have subjected the council to random drug tests. The proposal, sponsored by Alderman Trent Trumbo, died for lack of a second.

"I view this resolution as dangerous political grandstanding, an invasion of the privacy of every alderman" Alderman Kit Williams, a former U.S. Army officer told the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette.

Trent Trumbo spoke with The Week Online:

"I introduced this measure because I have a problem with double standards. We test our fire and police personnel, and beginning next year we will be randomly testing every student in our public schools. The reaction that I've had from my constituents is, 'why are we getting tested but you, who make the rules, don't have to submit to tests.' That came from a number of sources, including students, and I didn't have a good answer for them."

Trumbo continued, "I have a lot of respect for the people with whom I serve on the council, we're all friends and if they think that random drug testing is an invasion of their privacy, I can understand that. But it seems to me that you then have to consider whether you ought to be mandating that someone else submit to something that you find objectionable when it pertains to you."

Regarding the city's plan to randomly drug test its students, Trumbo added:

"Personally, I think that testing students might well be beneficial, in that it gives kids a way to say no, to resist peer pressure. But I didn't think it was right to test only those students who participate in extra-curricular activities, the way we have it right now, without testing everyone. Again, that's a double standard. And I would add that the reason that I support the testing of students at all is that the results are completely confidential. We offer help and counseling. This isn't about catching people and getting kids in trouble, its about finding out who may need help and then offering it to them."

Alderman Kit Williams, who strongly opposed the measure, told The Week Online, "I can certainly understand Alderman Trumbo's concern over double standards, but two wrongs, in this case two invasions of privacy, certainly don't make a right. I'm opposed to random drug testing under any circumstances. If there's cause, or if, in the case of a driver there's an accident, okay. But to test someone without cause, to me, is improper. Until this vote, I wasn't really aware of the new policy for students, which is under the direction of the board of education, not the city council. My son recently graduated from high school here. He was a swimmer and he made good grades. He was never tested, and I'm not sure he would have objected, but I sure as heck would have."

Williams continued. "Now, we're under federal mandate to test our drivers, but here we are looking to expand that program to include a whole bunch of new city employees. Anyone whose job is 'safety sensitive', and let me tell you that the city plans to interpret that very broadly. I know that the supreme court has ruled on this, and that they have been generally supportive of testing, and I tend to think that they have it wrong. But there's a difference between what is legal and what constitutes good policy. The constitution defines only the outer limits of governmental power."

"I was a prosecutor in this state for over five years," Williams, who is now a defense attorney concluded. "And let me tell you that my experience taught me that the drug which causes the most problems, the most violence and the most suffering in our state is alcohol. Hands down."

7. New Jersey Supreme Court Finds Right to Jury Trial in Forfeiture Cases

New Jersey's highest court last week affirmed a lower court decision giving people whose property had been forfeited by authorities the right to a jury trial in their quest to get it back. The ruling affects more than 2,500 New Jersey residents whose cases are either pending or on appeal, as well as all future cases. Last year alone, New Jersey police seized $16.9 million in property. That money is added to the budgets of local law enforcement agencies. More than 80% of people who have their property seized nationwide are never charged with any crime.

The underlying case involved Lois McDermott, a 67 year-old woman whose 46 year-old son used her 1990 Honda in connection with a drug deal. Elizabeth Macron, McDermott's attorney argues that not only did her client have nothing to do with the crime, but that she never even gave her son permission to use the car. John T. Paff of the organization Forfeiture Endangers American Rights (FEAR) told the Newark Star-Ledger "I think (the decision) will go a long way toward restoring some sanity."

You can visit FEAR on the web at http://www.fear.org.

8. March To Stop The Drug War, Berkeley, CA, 9/26

On Saturday, September 26, activists will gather at 1:00pm at the corner of Haste and Telegraph Ave. for a March Against the Drug War. The march is sponsored by The Committee To End The Drug War, Cannabis Action Network, Alameda County Peace and Freedom Party, November Coalition, Jon Crowder, candidate for Mayor of Berkeley, and the Rosebud Archive Project, among others. There will be a planning meeting on September 21. For further information, please call (510) 649-0874.

(Other upcoming events were listed two issues ago at http://www.drcnet.org/wol/056.html#events.)

9. First-Ever Global Conference on How To Legalize Cannabis

Experts from around the world gathered in London last weekend (9/5 - 9/6) to tackle the question that they see as the next logical step in the growing movement for cannabis law reform under the title, "Regulating Cannabis: Options for Control in the 21st Century".

The conference was hosted by Release, a UK-based drug information organization, and The Lindesmith Center (http://www.lindesmith.org), a NY-based think tank on drug and drug policy issues. The conference featured scientists, doctors, lawyers and academics from across Europe, Australia and North America who discussed issues such as taxation, age restrictions, advertising and marketing limits within a legal but regulated paradigm.

Mike Goodman, director of Release, told The Guardian (UK) "Most prominent scientists, medical professionals and policy experts agree that alternatives to cannabis prohibition need to be developed to both prevent further harm and protect individual civil liberties."

Rob Kampia, legislative director of the US-based Marijuana Policy Project (http://www.mpp.org), told The Week Online, "Previously I had not spent a whole lot of time looking into the marijuana policies and reform efforts in other countries, because the U.S. congress doesn't care what's happening in other countries. While I still believe that Congress doesn't care, I found the conference to be useful in that it provided a menu of strategies and tactics that we can use in the U.S. to bring about the end of marijuana prohibition."

10. Attention College Students!

Labor Day has come and gone which means that summer is definitely over. Here at DRCNet, that means that its time to re-open our campus-based U-net discussion list for current and potential drug policy activists.

If you are a college or grad student who would like to become more involved in the movement for drug policy reform, both on a campus-wide and on a national level, or, if you are currently active but want to significantly broaden the scope and impact of your efforts, U-net is for you.

U-net is an email discussion list where you will interact with activists on campuses nationwide, share ideas and strategies, learn how to strengthen your media efforts and find new ways to make a difference. Launched during the Spring '98 semester, U-net attracted participants from over 70 schools in just a few months. This year, we are hoping to reach 125 different campuses and to provide not only a forum for discussion but a central meeting place to plan activism that will resonate far beyond your campus. Some of our plans include:

• Ways to offer your members an easy means of staying connected with the movement -- even the ones who don't come to meetings!
• "College Reform Spotlight" A special section of the DRCNet web site devoted to campus-based activism, issues that affect students and ways to get involved. (The Campus Spotlight will go online this morning and will probably be up and running by the time you get this e-mail -- check it out at http://www.drcnet.org/U-net/.)
• A monthly e-zine highlighting campus activism and activists, as well as campus drug policies, around the country.
• Opportunities for dedicated activists to become regular reporters for The Week Online and for the student monthly (a great way to build a portfolio of published materials).
• Media skills support: How to write a press release that will get noticed, who to send it to, how to get reporters interested in your organization or activities, how to write op-eds for your campus paper, how to make the most use of campus and local radio and TV stations, etc.
• And much more!

TO SUBSCRIBE: send e-mail to [email protected] with the line "subscribe U-net your name" in the body of the message (not the subject). Be sure to leave off the quotes and substitute your own name. (Note that last year's subscriber list was lost due to a hardware failure, so you will need to subscribe again if were on last year.) Write to Troy Dayton at [email protected] or Kris Lotlikar at [email protected] if you need assistance subscribing. (Other are welcome on the list, but please respect the purpose of the list for campus issues.)

11. NY Attorney General Candidates Admit Past Marijuana Use

Three out of the four Democratic candidates for New York Attorney General, the highest law enforcement post in the state, have admitted that they smoked marijuana in their youth. Eliot Spitzer, Catherine Abate and Evan Davis have all confirmed prior use of the Schedule I substance, while the fourth candidate, Oliver Koppel, will not comment at all.

Davis' use seems to have negatively impacted his memory, as he says, "Maybe three, four times, something like that, in the late 60's, mid-60's, maybe early 70's -- I can't remember the dates -- I smoked marijuana... I never bought it, it was always at parties." Abate, a Vassar College student and anti-war activist in the 60's, admits to smoking it but says that she now tells her 19 year-old son to do otherwise. Spitzer, a Princeton grad who has promised, if elected, to abolish New York's draconian Rockefeller drug laws, fessed up. "Absolutely. With pride, at the time." Mike Zabel, spokesman for incumbent Republican Dennis Vacco, who opposes even the medicinal use of marijuana, cut off inquiring journalists on the issue. "Never" he said.

12. Patient's Glaucoma Justified Medical Marijuana Use, Cultivation, Canadian Judge Rules

(reprinted from the NORML Weekly News, http://www.norml.org)

September 10, 1998, Vancouver, British Columbia: A provincial court judge in Vancouver recently ruled that a patient's medical need for marijuana shielded him from criminal drug charges.

"This case is significant because a judge, not known to be lenient in this Province, was nevertheless persuaded that it was... not contrary to the public interest to grant [the defendant] a conditional discharge" for possessing marijuana, said NORML Legal Committee member John Conroy, who argued the case. The judge was clearly influenced by the "nature of the defendant's motives, namely self medication, and the absence of any harm to others by his conduct," he said.

Defendant Stanley Czolowski, who uses marijuana medicinally to treat glaucoma and nausea, faced charges of cultivating marijuana and possessing the drug for the purpose of supplying a local medical marijuana dispensary. The Crown dropped the trafficking charge in exchange for a guilty plea to the cultivation charge. Judge Jane Godfrey exercised judicial discretion when sentencing Czolowski and gave the defendant only one year probation. Godfrey based the mitigated sentence on the fact that Czolowski grew marijuana solely for medical purposes.

"I have heard from the accused and I have read the material that [details] what [the defendant's] daily existence is like, and I have no difficulty whatsoever in understanding his personal motivation and I have extreme sympathy for his personal situation," Judge Godfrey said. "I have considered the facts before me and ... am satisfied it's not contrary to the public interest ... to grant [the defendant] a discharge."

Czolowski will not have a criminal record if he successfully completes his probation. This decision is the latest in a series of recent Canadian court rulings distinguishing medical marijuana users from other criminal offenders.

13. EDITORIAL: Long, Hot Summer

The passage of Labor Day traditionally signifies the end of summer, and for the people of Oklahoma, who have suffered through scorching, searing, record-breaking heat, relief cannot come soon enough. But daily temperatures in the triple digits have not been the only factor in equating the Sooner State with hell this year. There is also the case of Will Foster. Foster, a rheumatoid arthritis sufferer arrested in 1996 for cultivating and using marijuana to ease his pain, began the summer as he had the previous two, serving an astounding 93-year prison term for his victimless "crime". But now, just as the end of summer portends a break in Oklahoma's Hades-like weather, there is a chance that Will Foster will gain reprieve from his own hellish odyssey.

At the time of his arrest, Foster was 38 years-old, was sole proprietor of a growing computer software business, and was living with his wife Meg, and three children. An anonymous tip brought more than a dozen police, both state and county, to their home, and, after kicking in the door and holding the family, including a seven year-old girl, at gunpoint, spent the next four hours tearing apart everything the Fosters owned. They found Foster's garden under lock and key in a converted bomb shelter under the house. More than 60 plants, many of them just inches tall, were seized.

The state offered Foster a deal. Twelve years for him and ten for Meg. But Foster, a former U.S. Army MP, would not agree to any terms which would result in jail time for Meg. Instead, he went to trial and Meg was forced to testify against him in return for her freedom. Local attorneys could not remember the last time that anyone had taken a drug case to trial in Tulsa county. Foster was about to find out why.

Despite Foster's condition, and owing to the fact that the state of Oklahoma does not recognize a medical necessity defense for the possession of marijuana, Stuart Southerland, his attorney, decided not to call a doctor to the stand in his defense. Neither did he call Will to the stand. Despite an absence of evidence that Foster had ever sold marijuana (he admitted to sharing some with a friend in his home, and with Meg - police found a total of $23 in the house) the prosecutor painted Foster as a scourge and a menace to society. "Pick a number, any number" he urged jurors during closing arguments, "and add two or three zeroes to it. Make sure that this man never walks free in our community again." And they did.

Seventy years for cultivation. Twenty years for possession in the presence of a minor (his daughter). Two years for intent to distribute, and an additional year for failure to have a state tax stamp for his crop. Ninety-three years for a man who had never so much as been accused of hurting a soul. Long enough to insure that he never breathed free again. Longer, in fact than Oklahoma has been a state.

Just months after Foster's sentencing, another story emerged from Oklahoma. This time a man who had admitted guilt in the beating death of his four year-old child was sentenced to four years in a plea bargain deal. The outcry was so great that the state's Governor, Frank Keating, wrote an op-ed in an Oklahoma newspaper blaming the short sentence on a lack of prison space and calling for money for more to be built. Still, Will Foster sat in jail, taking up a space that was not being used for a violent, dangerous criminal.

In a stroke of sheer irony, within a year of Foster's arrest and imprisonment, two states, California and Arizona, passed, by significant margins, initiatives which legalized the possession and use of marijuana for medicinal purposes. In addition, while Foster was shuffled from institution to institution, far from his family, research conducted at the University of California showed that certain cannabinoids in the marijuana plant were quite effective in the control of the pain and inflammation of rheumatoid arthritis. None of this, of course, would be of any use to Foster, who sat, under-medicated, behind bars.

Over the past two years, Will Foster and his case have become a rallying point for people around the country, and in fact around the world, who have become concerned by the excesses of America's Drug War. Supporters, united primarily over the Internet, wrote letters and spread the word. Foster's case was featured on national and international television, in magazines and on web sites. No one, it seemed, could stomach the thought that this man had been sentenced to 93 years, to death, really, for choosing to treat his pain in an unauthorized manner.

Foster's family, Meg's family really, dug deep. They hired the best appellate attorney in the state, and despite the fact that they are people of modest means, have spent over $100,000 trying to free Will. Finally, after serious questions were raised about the validity of the (unsigned) search warrant, about the veracity of the police claims regarding the confidential informant (the warrant claimed that the informant, who was not required to appear at trial, had bought methamphetamine from the Foster home just days before the bust, yet absolutely no evidence of methamphetamine was found, not a trace) and even regarding the existence of an informant at all, a ruling came down from the Court of Appeals. In it, the appellate court said that the sentence handed down to Will Foster "shocked the conscience," and ordered that the four, consecutively-running sentences be reduced to a single, twenty-year term.

As it happens, the Oklahoma legislature, during its 1998 term, passed a law called the "Truth in Sentencing Act," requiring that violent offenders serve at least 85% of their sentences before being eligible for parole. But because they could not decide whether to include non-violent offenders under the act, and because the bill was considered late in the short term, the legislature adjourned before making the decision, thus leaving such offenders out of the equation. The exclusion, combined with the appellate decision, made Foster eligible for parole immediately.

The Oklahoma parole board heard Foster's case within weeks of the appellate ruling, and, noting Foster's condition, as well as the knowledge of at least one board member of an acquaintance who benefited from the medicinal use of marijuana, and the absence of any conceivable threat that Foster posed to the community, recommended his immediate parole. Suddenly, summer had broken in Oklahoma.

So now, the recommendation of the parole board is on its way to the desk of Governor Frank Keating. And the same Governor Keating who was so justifiably outraged that a child murderer in his state was able to cop a plea to a four-year sentence because of a lack of prison space, has the opportunity to free up a cell, Will Foster's cell, by releasing a man who has never, in his life, harmed a soul. Over the past several days, concerned citizens from around the world have been contacting Keating's office and urging him to do just that. It would be a victory for the cause of justice, and would mean the world to Will Foster's family. Foster's release would herald the coming of the end of Oklahoma's long, hot summer of oppression. And it would pull the man himself from the very depths of hell.

If you like what you see here and want to get these bulletins by e-mail, please fill out our quick signup form at https://stopthedrugwar.org/WOLSignup.shtml.

PERMISSION to reprint or redistribute any or all of the contents of Drug War Chronicle is hereby granted. We ask that any use of these materials include proper credit and, where appropriate, a link to one or more of our web sites. If your publication customarily pays for publication, DRCNet requests checks payable to the organization. If your publication does not pay for materials, you are free to use the materials gratis. In all cases, we request notification for our records, including physical copies where material has appeared in print. Contact: StoptheDrugWar.org: the Drug Reform Coordination Network, P.O. Box 18402, Washington, DC 20036, (202) 293-8340 (voice), (202) 293-8344 (fax), e-mail [email protected]. Thank you.

Articles of a purely educational nature in Drug War Chronicle appear courtesy of the DRCNet Foundation, unless otherwise noted.

Out from the Shadows HEA Drug Provision Drug War Chronicle Perry Fund DRCNet en Español Speakeasy Blogs About Us Home Why Legalization? NJ Racial Profiling Archive Subscribe Donate DRCNet em Português Latest News Drug Library Search special friends links: SSDP - Flex Your Rights - IAL - Drug War Facts StoptheDrugWar.org: the Drug Reform Coordination Network (DRCNet) 1623 Connecticut Ave., NW, 3rd Floor, Washington DC 20009 Phone (202) 293-8340 Fax (202) 293-8344 [email protected]